California and San Francisco are spending $86.5 million for a 160 room building for the homeless. Another $8.5 million will be spend on operating expenses. That’s a purchase price of over $540K per room and over $50K per room in operating costs. The city has over 8,000 people currently homeless.
What could possibly go wrong?
If you subsidize something the demand will go up. A $500K condo and $50K towards living costs? I’d bet they will get “homeless” people from all over the country, if not the world.
This has to be a deliberate destruction of wealth. No one can be that stupid and/or naïve.
It is government money so it’s free! Besides that, homeless people really need to be cared for so how can you complain about the desire for politicians to really step out and exercise compassion?! The foregoing was about as sarcastic as I can write so don’t think for a second that I support it. I would bet that if you did a little digging into the project initiation and contractor selection and/or operations plan, you would find some well connected people that just happen to be selected as the most “responsive” bidder(s) for the project. Nothing to see here. Move along.
What they really need is a solid concrete structure with hydrophobic paint on all the walls and one piece stainless steel fixtures and bed frames, all attached to the walls. The only way to protect “our” investment as tax payers. What you say? It looks like a jail. Yep, there is a reason for that and if you don’t like living there then get a job and pay your own way AND your share of the taxes!
Yerp, built like prisons lest the structures and the residents be destroyed like those in every U.S. urban “project” that has ever been built.
The potential residents are not just “down on their luck”. They are invariably disordered, antisocial individuals who destroy everything around them. The old term for “homeless” was “CATO” [Crazy, Addicts, Tramps, Other]. A small percentage of the “Other” might benefit from a respit and some assistance. The “Tramps” are not like those in mythology. They are ones who have no interest in those around them. Like every project in the U.S. that population will destroy any environment that they live in. The group that wanders San Francisco, crapping in the street, will also crap in their living space and in the hallways. Because of how they behave, the biggest costs will be in security and repairs.
“Society” didn’t do that to them. They just “ain’t right”. Their constant maladaptive behavior will brutalize any system, leaving only a prison-like environment. Even a prison environment may be too much to hope for. Eventually, like Pruitt-Igo projects in Saint Louis, there will be no alternative except demolition. The Progressive fantasy is a path to grift and failure.
I’ll assume the condo and operating cost are 1/3 the listed price and the rest will be skim for the city government and payoffs for the correct people.
I will also assume that it will not be built in Madame Speaker’s neighborhood.
Those assumptions are what we called “Sucker Bets.” No one will bet against the truth of your assumptions.
I’m reminded of Orwell’s theory of unending war. Perpetual destruction creates unending need which is used as the reason to keep the party in power.
And of course, in 10 years time it will be a shambles, causing someone to decry the state of this ‘old’ housing and demand that it be torn down. More money will be spent on new ‘housing’ somewhere nearby and the cycle continues.
Don’t worry, they won’t all go to California. Some of them will go to Austin, where the mayor is engaging in a similar scheme.
Seattle does similar things. Liberalism is a mental disorder.
A friend suggested something I find amusing. He suggested that Seattle could (nearly) permanently eliminate the homeless problem in the area buy building a big homeless center just outside of Portland and run a free shuttle for homeless people in the Seattle area to the homeless center.
We should help. Round up junkies from all over the country and pack them into SF.
Wasn’t something wrote by Cloward & Piven about this subject?
In So. Oregon the gospel mission had beds empty every night. Why? Because you had to be sober. Oh, and probably have to listen to a little preaching at dinner.
Sounded like a bargain to me.
Our problem is that were so bored we have to invent problems to fix.
What we need to do is ban Narcan. Darwin can handle the rest.
truth to power. or, in plainer terms, the more you feed the pigeons, the more pigeons you got. with the attendant pigeon shit.
Each and every one of those “rooms” will be untenable within a year. The bums they install in them will totally trash the place.
Hence my claim of deliberate destruction.
How do you spend $450K per room? It’s not just graft. IIRC, one LA councilwoman proclaimed marble countertops were a human right.